Letters: Prisoner rehabilitation: A health issue or a social issue

Thank you, Chester Borrows, for bringing attention to the area of pre- and post-rehabilitation in prisons.

Is it a health issue or is it a social issue? The answer I feel is both - the social issue becomes the health issue which becomes the social issue and so on.

I accept that funders need evidence - and rightly so - however, all the evidence needs to be thought through, not just evidence to fit paradigms of one or two ways of thinking.

My hope is that mental health includes evidence-based therapy or programmes which involve relational services which encourage self-management, awareness and support rather than individuality and dependency. A model which includes looking at what matters to us rather than what's wrong.

Prevention, I believe, also is the key. Let's put more money into ensuring the best possible attachment happens at birth between caregiver and baby, and investing in current services which already work in that area such as maternal mental health, Plunket, foster care programmes, and family services like Jigsaw.

Healthy attachments can be also evidenced. Why aren't we doing this?

Short-term solutions, hopefully, will one day not have a place and we will consider looking much wider than we currently do.

CARLA LANGMEAD, Whanganui

Farming v cycling

Recently, Andrew Hoggard, dairy farmer and agri-industry lobbyist, complained on RNZ as only dairy farmers can, without the butter melting in his mouth, about the annual one day ''Tour de Manawatu'' cycle race causing road congestion.

I remind Mr Hoggard that tourism and events such as the cycle race bring more money to the economy than the heavily indebted and polluting farming industry.

I can attest that the countryside is increasing in noise and pollution from large utes, tractors and heavy trucks, not to mention agrichemical aircraft.

Also, Federated Farmers, to which Mr Hoggard belongs, successfully lobbied Manawatu District Council to extend hours and noise levels allowed by farm-related vehicles.

A DAY, Whanganui

Free speech

A foundation of modern democracy is the right of freedom of speech. This is most important when people are saying something other people don't like.

Of course, it is not an absolute freedom - it is logical not to allow people to claim the protection of freedom of speech when they are calling for violence against others.

Saying: "Go kill Fred" should not be called a right, but saying: "Fred is a disgusting person" should be a right, even though it is not nice.

In some countries there are laws to stop such things as so-called "hate speech".

If what is being said is truly "hateful", then most people will ignore it or point out what is wrong with it.

But there is also the issue of who decides what is "hate speech".

In some places, saying Fred is a disgusting person would be acceptable if Fred was a Christian, or a Trump supporter, or opposed to abortion, but would be considered hate speech if Fred was a violent criminal of a certain ethnic background.

The application of the term comes down to subjective viewpoints.

The Chronicle is a forum for a certain amount of free speech, overseen by the editor, and it offers people the opportunity to share their views.

Keith Beautrais is one who benefits from this forum and, while I disagree with the way he presents his views in his latest letter, I support his right to say what he thinks.

It is a pity he doesn't support this right for others. Keith calls for the Chronicle to refuse to publish letters that Keith considers to be "racist", "prejudiced" or "bigoted".

Keith's specific example is a letter that mentioned a "Muslim murderer", which is apparently a terrible thing to do because we have Muslims in Wanganui who aren't murderers.

Well, of course we do, and the letter never suggested we didn't, but all that is beside the point.

If we stifle the speech of some people because we disagree with their views, we stifle the freedom of all.

K A BENFELL, Gonville

Waitaha people

Pukenamu/Queens Park - "Council push to rename reserve" (Chronicle, March 16): To Maori, Pukenamu was a pa in the 1830s and the site of the last tribal war in Wanganui. What was supposed to be a fortified pa would have been a well-established village centuries before that, probably built by the Waitaha people who lived in the area and built the other pa further up the river.

The translation of pounamu could mean "Sandfly Hill", though sometimes namu is a shortened version of pounamu, the precious greenstone jade.

Councillor Helen Craig said it was important to acknowledge the reserve's Maori history, yet it doesn't seen important to acknowledge the existence of the Waitaha people.

IAN BROUGHAM, Tawhero